This is a rather silly conundrum designed to show that "[[omnipotent]]" is actually a meaningless term.

+

The paradoxical question, "'''Can God create a rock so heavy that he can't lift it?'''" is a rather silly conundrum designed to show that the term ''[[omnipotent]]'' is actually meaningless.

−

Omnipotent means "all-powerful". If [[God]] can do everything, then He should be able to create such a rock. But once the rock is created, He should also be able to lift it, which contradicts the first claim.

+

Omnipotent means "all-powerful", which is typically understood to mean "able to do anything". If [[God]] can do anything, then he should be able to create such a rock. But once the rock is created, he should also be able to lift it, which contradicts the first claim.

This is reminiscent of a story about a medieval arms salesman who boasted that his sword was so sharp that it could penetrate any armor, and his shield was so tough that it could withstand any attack. A member of the crowd called out, "What happens when you strike your sword against your own shield?" The salesman was stumped.

This is reminiscent of a story about a medieval arms salesman who boasted that his sword was so sharp that it could penetrate any armor, and his shield was so tough that it could withstand any attack. A member of the crowd called out, "What happens when you strike your sword against your own shield?" The salesman was stumped.

Line 9:

Line 9:

Similarly, there cannot exist a rock that cannot be lifted in a universe that also contains a God who can lift anything. Yet this proves that there is something that God cannot create.

Similarly, there cannot exist a rock that cannot be lifted in a universe that also contains a God who can lift anything. Yet this proves that there is something that God cannot create.

−

How do we get out of the paradox? An [[atheist]] would answer that the very idea of being "all-powerful" is meaningless and not worthy of consideration in the real world. However, [[apologists]] often respond that "all-powerful" means "God can do everything... that is logically possible."

+

How do we get out of the paradox? An [[atheist]] would answer that the very idea of being "all-powerful" is meaningless and not worthy of consideration in the real world. However, [[apologists]] often respond that "all-powerful" means "God can do everything... that is ''logically possible''" (a common example given is that God can't create a square circle).

−

While this is a plausible way out of the paradox, it may also be seen as the first step down a slippery slope: if God cannot make a square circle because the definition is nonsensical, then neither can he make an electron with both well-defined position and well-defined momentum, because such a thing is self-contradictory in exactly the same way. How many logical restrictions can we put on God's powers before he ceases to be [[omnipotent]]?

+

As [[C.S. Lewis]] states in ''[[Mere Christianity]]'':

+

:"''His omnipotence includes power to do all that is intrinsically possible, not to do the intrinsically impossible. You may attribute miracles to Him, but not nonsense.''"

+

This raises the question of what exactly a [[miracle]] is, if not doing the impossible. Of course, the qualifier ''intrinsically'' is an important one. Still, this seems to paint a picture of God as simply the ''most'' powerful being in the universe, instead of an ''all-''powerful one.

−

[[Category: Arguments]]

+

Also, God cannot ''improve'' himself since that would mean that he lacks a necessary attribute, although improvement is something which is logically possible to all human beings. Therefore, God is not omnipotent.

+

+

Of course a person of the Catholic faith might argue that this paradox can be resolved by the idea of the "Holy Trinity", in so much that the "Heavenly Father" could easily create a rock that Jesus, being human, could not lift. Since they believe the "Heavenly Father" and Jesus are one and the same. However, this is fallacious as in such a context, "God" would refer to the entire trinity.

Revision as of 09:24, 18 March 2010

The paradoxical question, "Can God create a rock so heavy that he can't lift it?" is a rather silly conundrum designed to show that the term omnipotent is actually meaningless.

Omnipotent means "all-powerful", which is typically understood to mean "able to do anything". If God can do anything, then he should be able to create such a rock. But once the rock is created, he should also be able to lift it, which contradicts the first claim.

This is reminiscent of a story about a medieval arms salesman who boasted that his sword was so sharp that it could penetrate any armor, and his shield was so tough that it could withstand any attack. A member of the crowd called out, "What happens when you strike your sword against your own shield?" The salesman was stumped.

The answer is that the salesman was lying about one of his products. Or to put it another way, a perfect sword and a perfect shield cannot exist simultaneously. If there exists any sword that can penetrate all shields, then by definition there does not exist any shield that can withstand all attacks.

Similarly, there cannot exist a rock that cannot be lifted in a universe that also contains a God who can lift anything. Yet this proves that there is something that God cannot create.

How do we get out of the paradox? An atheist would answer that the very idea of being "all-powerful" is meaningless and not worthy of consideration in the real world. However, apologists often respond that "all-powerful" means "God can do everything... that is logically possible" (a common example given is that God can't create a square circle).

"His omnipotence includes power to do all that is intrinsically possible, not to do the intrinsically impossible. You may attribute miracles to Him, but not nonsense."

This raises the question of what exactly a miracle is, if not doing the impossible. Of course, the qualifier intrinsically is an important one. Still, this seems to paint a picture of God as simply the most powerful being in the universe, instead of an all-powerful one.

Also, God cannot improve himself since that would mean that he lacks a necessary attribute, although improvement is something which is logically possible to all human beings. Therefore, God is not omnipotent.

Of course a person of the Catholic faith might argue that this paradox can be resolved by the idea of the "Holy Trinity", in so much that the "Heavenly Father" could easily create a rock that Jesus, being human, could not lift. Since they believe the "Heavenly Father" and Jesus are one and the same. However, this is fallacious as in such a context, "God" would refer to the entire trinity.